Wasn’t Strickland traded for Harrington mid season? I think there must have been another trade that cost Layden the picks. What did they actaully turn into? A lot of people passed on Arenas, Parker, et al. And put major stock in Kwame. Without hindsight there is hardly a guarentee Layden (or Thomas) would have drafted them. (Though I’d take Isiah running my draft over Layden anyday). A few years down the road there are always people you realize you should have taken with the pick. It’s tough to really blame people for not taking guys that slip into the second round. (**unlike ’99 when the Garden crowd was howling for Artest. That one you can place blame for… In 2001 no one was howling for Gerald Wallce or Okur.)

]]>By: Melhttp://KnickerBlogger.Net/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-129004
Sun, 09 Sep 2007 20:07:54 +0000http://www.knickerblogger.net/2007/09/03/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-129004basically Layden took a flawed but EC champ team to the lottery in 2 years as a capped out unathletic aging unit with no young guys worth a darn.

the 2 1st round picks he got for Ewing he traded for erick strickland and othella harrington , leaving guys like tony parker , okur, gerald wallace and gilbert arenas on the board to be picked by other teams .

he really did have his chance to rebuild on the fly but choose to put band aids on bullet wounds in a manner of speaking.

]]>By: Frankhttp://KnickerBlogger.Net/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-128949
Sun, 09 Sep 2007 15:52:53 +0000http://www.knickerblogger.net/2007/09/03/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-128949Hi all- have been out of town for a few days and just got back to the board. I love this board.

So anyway in my defense–

“I understand that, despite the fact that Layden?s squads actually won more games that the roster needed to turn over to become younger and more viable. I truly wonder, though, if in somebody elses hands, the roster could have turned over more efficiently and productively. We?ll never know, but judging by other other team?s ?rebuilding? process? I think it could have.”

Like you said — it’s difficult to say what woulda/coulda/shoulda happened with another GM. But I truly think that the degree to which Layden’s last roster stunk in terms of not just ability but assets and cap management made it nearly an impossible situation for any incoming GM. Like someone said in an earlier post, Layden’s roster had no chance to be anything much more than a .500 team and a first round exit– forever! And when Isiah came in he said immediately that he needed to upgrade the talent on the roster even if it required unconventional means — and I think the talent upgrade he has accomplished is really impressive, if not yet producing tangible results (yet). A talent-less, capped-out for years roster with no movable contracts is mission impossible for any GM.

“Phoenix took a good part of this roster and went on to win 60 games.”

Already addressed by TFK and others — taking on a couple of useless players when you have young superstars in the making is much different than having an entire roster of useless, unmovable players.

Re: the Larry brown issue:

I don’t think Larry Brown was trying to sabotage the Knicks in order to destroy the franchise or to make money. I really think he loves the Knicks and he definitely has boatloads of money. But the roster as it was assembled was not his kind of roster, so I really think he tanked the season and convinced Isiah to make trades like the Francis trade in order to produce a result so terrible that someone would need to be fired. I think he just thought that Isiah and not Larry would be fired, especially given his $40M remaining and his track record. Then Larry would have been made either coach/GM or would have a lot of input as to who the next GM was. And he could remake the roster.

I give Isiah a pass because even knowing Brown’s past history of wearing out his welcome, I don’t think anyone could have or should have predicted a willful sabotage of his so-called dream job. I think people across the NBA (and this board) were shocked when it turned out so badly. To take the McDonald’s reference someone used above, it’s like hiring the CEO of McDonald’s to make your McDonald’s franchise run better, then having him systematically poison the hamburgers and replacing the cups with dribble glasses on the hot coffee.

“Maybe it is too much to ask that the man given the reins to the biggest NBA market with the deepest fan support be great at what they do.”

Actually – you’re totally right. Isiah is not doing a great job — I could never argue that he’s doing a great overall job given the # of wins he has produced — but I think the jury is still out on what the final result will be. Just like Checkett’s jumped the gun on Grunfeld too early when players like Camby, Sprewell, Houston were starting to jell and play well together, leading to that great run, which ultimately led to the awful Frederic Weis pick instead of the obvious Artest pick. I agree that Grunfeld probably is a better GM than Isiah, but I just don’t want to run Isiah out of town without giving his hand-picked roster of good young talent at least 1-2 years of non-injury decimated years to play to their potential.

And as much as I have bashed Layden on this board — I will give him props for one move, which may surprise you. I loved the McDyess trade when it happened. I thought it was everything Layden had been afraid to try throughout his tenure: daring but with extremely high potential for return as opposed to signing ShanHowardella Eisrringderson. McDyess was potentially a true franchise player — a PF that was likeable, could score in and out, a great rebounder, good shot blocker, and stayed out of trouble. I think he got extraordinarily unlucky with the knee injury, and that trade (along with the Ewing trade) is in large part responsible for the ridiculous hole he created that Isiah is still trying to climb out of.

]]>By: Zhttp://KnickerBlogger.Net/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-128438
Sat, 08 Sep 2007 06:31:33 +0000http://www.knickerblogger.net/2007/09/03/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-128438I addressed my last comments to Frank. I would have rather seen his response since tfk’s have become predictably irrational. I?m responding– not so much to convince him, but because I too have no life.

“Well, you?ve already stated that you expected him to be over .500 before he even started the job. How do you expect him to meet expectations like that?”

Isiah has 4 seasons associated with his name (he was hired in Dec. of 2003. It is now 2007). His first (the one he shared with the anti-christ Layden) was the one that he ended up closest to .500; The one he made the playoffs with; The one that he sauntered out to center court in the Spring of 2004 and said “welcome back to the playoffs New York” with a big Isiah grin, as if he was setting the stage for multiple playoff appearances to come. So yeah, for 4 years I’ve been expecting the playoffs. Call me crazy…

“Why will we never know? A group of people I know have a contest every year to come up with an off-season plan to improve the Knicks. None of our plans have ever been anywhere near the level of what Thomas? has done.”

???

“Brown?s a crazy, vindictive, spiteful man. He wanted to hurt the Knicks as much as possible for the perceived slights against him. To do so most effectively he sabotaged the team and then squeezed the franchise for money. Call it adding insult to injury. What a petty, horrible person. Not that I dislike him or anything like that.”

I still don’t get it. He planned to throw the season before it began? What were the perceived slights against him before the season began? The Knicks started terrible and finished worse. There was no point when the season collapsed. It was lost in November.

Maybe Brown was 100% at fault and is the biggest anti-Christ since Layden (2 whole years), but there is no way to know what went down without being either Brown or Isiah. I think, most likely, they are both to blame equally, and since Isiah hired him in the first place, Layden suddenly doesn’t even look so bad. His flaw was extreme loyalty to Don Chaney, a good person and a decent coach. That helps a mediocre team win more than a dysfunctional GM-coach relationship does.

(Again, only TFK could make me defend Larry Brown so much…)

“for some reason I blame Brown?s actions primarily on himself. I?m still somewhat married to the concept of personal responsibility”

Okay. But taking McDonalds to court over hot coffee is not the same thing at all. Taking the same example, I’d say that if hot coffee is spilled and second degree burns occur at a McDonalds that I owned (and I was a good owner) I would not be happy, if for no other reason than for the bad PR. I would find out who spilled the coffee, and if it turned out to be a meth addict already fired from Burger King and Wendy’s, I’d find the manager who hired that guy and fire him or her. The person who hires the crazy-nut-job evil villains of the world is not fit to hold the hiring card (I think that might be the Peter Principle in effect).

?Grunfeld?s firing was unfortunate and a very poor decision. He wasn?t fired as a result of being ?held accountable? but more so because Checketts felt someone had to be fired. It?s that sort of irrational behavior that led to the Knicks becoming a complete mess.?

My Grunfeld comments were in the context of the Brown-Isiah ?power struggle? (Franks term). Checketts sided with Van Gundy and not Grunfeld when he felt one must go. The result? The team gelled, got it together at exactly that point, and made a memorable playoff run that was bad in the long term, but brought a few weeks of priceless moments. The coach is more important than the GM, especially when the games have begun to be played. Certainly in 2005 one of the two had to go. Isiah was left standing, and that?s why we?re discussing his failures now and not Brown?s.

Fact is, the Knicks could feasibly have a better team and better future if Layden was still GM and Chaney was still coach. All hindsight/assumption, but to say it couldn?t be lacks objectivity.

?Dumars inherited a highly competitive roster.?

My memory doesn?t remember 2000 too well. I had to review the roster. Hoops Analyst had this to say of the Pistons in 2000: ?[Dumars] had to rebuild a mediocre team with little talent to speak of.? He succeed in turning the two highly paid franchise players (Hill and Stackhouse) into Ben Wallace and Rip Hamilton– the core of a title team. The rest of that 2000 team was Jud Buechler, Eric Montross, John Crotty, Christian Laettner (and some black guys that weren?t much better). I think Dumars rightly gets more credit as a GM than Isiah.

?Danny Ainge has been an unmitigated disaster and the only reason he has a chance this year is because of his good friend Kevin McHale.?

How can one hold it against Ainge that he has friends in high places. GMing is networking.

?Try and come up with a better scenario than what Thomas has put together. And you have the benefit of three years worth of hindsight.?

You are basically arguing that Isiah did as well a job assembling the current Knicks as God could have done. You really don?t think that anybody with three years of hindsight could put together a better team than the one we see today? That is preposterous. (I kind of like it). I guess all I?ll say is that in hindsight, I probably would have lottery protected the Ty Thomas pick.

?As far as the Bulls go, they became a better team after the departure of Crawford because they added Gordon, Deng, and Nocioni that off-season.?

They added Gordon and Crawford became expendable. The Bulls had a feeling Crawford was the least worth holding onto of Hinrich, Gordon, and Jamal. Maybe dealing Gordon and retaining Crawford would have resulted in the same (or better) product. No way to know. Their record, however, reflects that the decision was a good one.

I’d take Ted’s team over Isiah’s. It’s a rediculous exercise, but I’d take Ted over Isiah, Layden, and TFK as GM.

All the particulars aside, would it really have been such a bad strategy in 2003 to look toward just one thing: signing LeBron. Worst case scenario: he resigns with Cleveland and the Knicks suck because of it but still have their picks. Best case scenario: the allure and $$$ of NY lure him away and the team gets its true franchise player. That strategy worked for the Lakers when they signed Shaq. It doesn’t matter that they only missed the playoffs twice in 30 years. They wanted Shaq. It was a perfect fit– LA glam, big market. Good for Shaq, good for LA, good for the NBA. LeBron in NY is the same.

It may not have worked, but it could have, and if it hadn’t I don’t think we’d be any worse off than we are right now.

over the next 3 years he’ll get 5.8, 6.2, and has a player option for 6.6.

There are his career salaries.

“Sure we can. Try and come up with a better scenario than what Thomas has put together. And you have the benefit of three years worth of hindsight.”

Like I’ve said, the Bobcats started with nothing, haven’t been that amazing in terms of their moves, and still won 33 games last season. The crazy Blazers who “don’t want to win games” and had only one talented player on last season’s team won only 1 game less than the Knicks.

I’ll see what I can do. I can’t exactly call up NBA decision makers and say would you have traded me x for y? Or former free agents and say would you have signed with me for x? I can say I would have gotten lucky and won the lottery and you can say that even though your team only won 10 games you still ended up with the #4 pick.

Then there is the problem of judging the team. The number of assumptions that go into this is incredible, and I don’t see how someone who hates assumptions so much thinks this is the best way to evaluate IT, but here goes…

I don’t know exactly when contracts would have expired, so I’ll try to just stay away from high priced free agents in general.
Rather than go through every player I would have added, I’ll stick to the ones that would still be on the team.

In the 2004 draft I’ll take Andre Igoudala if the Knicks would have ended up with the 9th pick. I’ll also top the Bulls offer of a second and future first for Luol Deng (2 protected 1sts and a 2nd).

We have a really bad season end up with the #4 pick and I take Cris Paul. In the 2nd I’ll pick up Monta Ellis. I’ll also trade my starting PF Mike Sweetney, who’s been averaging 14 and 8 (and 5 fouls a game) on my 25 win team and is so efficient that statheads love the big guy, for a pick in the 20s or early in the 2nd and grab David Lee.

This season goes much better, but we just miss the playoffs, end up with the #11 pick, and don’t have to send it to the Suns since it’s protected. I go with Thabo Sefalosha. With my mid 2nd I go with Millsap. I also outbid the Blazers for the Suns #27 pick and I’ve got to choose between Balkman and Rodriguez, because backing up Paul is less of a priority than getting some bigs I take Balkman (who I’m going to assume slides, you can say he wouldn’t but I thought the Suns weren’t interested in people who can’t shoot-odd given their 07 picks of Tucker and Strawberry-and they’re the only ones I heard were interested, if he doesn’t slide I’ll pick up Rodriguez).

We make the playoffs in 06-07 and I have to ship my first to the Suns. It doesn’t really matter as I’ve never seen any 2007 picks play an NBA game, but let’s say I take D.J. Strawberry in the 2nd.

So, only using the draft and a couple draft related trades I’ve put together a roster of Chris Paul, Andre Igoudala, Luol Deng, David Lee, and say resigned Kurt Thomas, Millsap, Balkman, Thabo, Strawberry, and Monta Ellis are coming off the bench.

I also would have picked up a few free agents along the way. Diop I would have given more than Dallas did. Udoka is someone I like alright. Matt Barnes maybe. And I need a backup PG…maybe Brevin Knight.

“The bottom line is that Thomas has given these teams the flexibility that they wanted and Thomas has gotten the better players he wanted. The trades were win/win, which is the basic underlying premise of engaging in trade. The expiring deals were useless to Thomas.”

All trades are win/win??? Was the Scottie Pippen/Olden Polenyce trade a win/win? You think Red Sox fans consider the Babe Ruth trade a win/win? C-Webb for Mitch Richmond…

If these “talented” players don’t help their team win games, what good is their talent? I think you’re going to have to wait until the All-Star break, or even after the season before you can convince me Isiah has done a good job… if the Knicks win around 50 games and at least take their first round series to 6 games I’ll be pretty convinced.

-On the trades, of course the teams had other players already and added players in various ways after the trades. The trend is still there.

-Do you really think Isiah was picking Kirk Snyder?? Josh Smith was still on the board, amongst others.

“The cap room allowed them to add more players, but Fred Jones was the only NBA free agent they brought in.”

Anthony Parker and Jorge Garbajosa were clearly their 2 best free agents last offseason, it doesn’t matter at all that they weren’t in the NBA. As they were both signed to about 4 mill per deals only one could have been brought in with the MLE.

]]>By: Ted Nelsonhttp://KnickerBlogger.Net/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-128326
Sat, 08 Sep 2007 00:42:04 +0000http://www.knickerblogger.net/2007/09/03/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-128326The 2005 2nd we got from Houston was because they signed JVG.

“His last contract was larger than his current contract. And he was the best available player, why not offer him the MLE?”

This is why it is not possible to debate with you. Jerome James was the best player available???

over the next 3 years he’ll get 5.8, 6.2, and has a player option for 6.6.

There are his career salaries.

“Sure we can. Try and come up with a better scenario than what Thomas has put together. And you have the benefit of three years worth of hindsight.”

Like I’ve said, the Bobcats started with nothing, haven’t been that amazing in terms of their moves, and still won 33 games last season. The crazy Blazers who “don’t want to win games” and had only one talented player on last season’s team won only 1 game less than the Knicks.

I’ll see what I can do. I can’t exactly call up NBA decision makers and say would you have traded me x for y? Or former free agents and say would you have signed with me for x? I can say I would have gotten lucky and won the lottery and you can say that even though your team only won 10 games you still ended up with the #4 pick.

Then there is the problem of judging the team. The number of assumptions that go into this is incredible, and I don’t see how someone who hates assumptions so much thinks this is the best way to evaluate IT, but here goes…

I don’t know exactly when contracts would have expired, so I’ll try to just stay away from high priced free agents in general.
Rather than go through every player I would have added, I’ll stick to the ones that would still be on the team.

In the 2004 draft I’ll take Andre Igoudala if the Knicks would have ended up with the 9th pick. I’ll also top the Bulls offer of a second and future first for Luol Deng (2 protected 1sts and a 2nd).

We have a really bad season end up with the #4 pick and I take Cris Paul. In the 2nd I’ll pick up Monta Ellis. I’ll also trade my starting PF Mike Sweetney, who’s been averaging 14 and 8 (and 5 fouls a game) on my 25 win team and is so efficient that statheads love the big guy, for a pick in the 20s or early in the 2nd and grab David Lee.

This season goes much better, but we just miss the playoffs, end up with the #11 pick, and don’t have to send it to the Suns since it’s protected. I go with Thabo Sefalosha. With my mid 2nd I go with Millsap. I also outbid the Blazers for the Suns #27 pick and I’ve got to choose between Balkman and Rodriguez, because backing up Paul is less of a priority than getting some bigs I take Balkman (who I’m going to assume slides, you can say he wouldn’t but I thought the Suns weren’t interested in people who can’t shoot-odd given their 07 picks of Tucker and Strawberry-and they’re the only ones I heard were interested, if he doesn’t slide I’ll pick up Rodriguez).

We make the playoffs in 06-07 and I have to ship my first to the Suns. It doesn’t really matter as I’ve never seen any 2007 picks play an NBA game, but let’s say I take D.J. Strawberry in the 2nd.

“The bottom line is that Thomas has given these teams the flexibility that they wanted and Thomas has gotten the better players he wanted. The trades were win/win, which is the basic underlying premise of engaging in trade. The expiring deals were useless to Thomas.”

All trades are win/win??? Was the Scottie Pippen/Olden Polenyce trade a win/win? You think Red Sox fans consider the Babe Ruth trade a win/win? C-Webb for Mitch Richmond…

If these “talented” players don’t help their team win games, what good is their talent? I think you’re going to have to wait until the All-Star break, or even after the season before you can convince me Isiah has done a good job… if the Knicks win around 50 games and at least take their first round series to 6 games I’ll be pretty convinced.

]]>By: thefatkidhttp://KnickerBlogger.Net/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-128179
Fri, 07 Sep 2007 18:09:06 +0000http://www.knickerblogger.net/2007/09/03/knicks-2007-report-card-a-to-z-malik-rose/#comment-128179?I wish I was as optimistic about his success, but I feel that ?if they can?t get over .500 this year, I?d see it as a major failure? has been the goal for four years now.?

Isiah Thomas hasn?t even been in NY for four years and you?ve been expecting him to produce a better than .500 every year? Talk about impatient!

?I don?t hate Isiah. Like most fans, I want the team to succeed and if Isiah succeeds I will be elated! That said, he?s been here 3+ seasons and has done little to give fans like me confidence in his ability to succeed.?

Well, you?ve already stated that you expected him to be over .500 before he even started the job. How do you expect him to meet expectations like that?

From another post I wrote:

?It was eight years between playoff appearances for the Nuggets, seven years for the Cavs, seven years for the Wizards, and six years for the Bulls, to name a few. The Knicks are on pace to return to the playoffs in year four of the rebuilding process and you?re clamoring for Isiah Thomas? head??
?I truly wonder, though, if in somebody elses hands, the roster could have turned over more efficiently and productively. We?ll never know, but judging by other other team?s ?rebuilding? process? I think it could have.?

Why will we never know? A group of people I know have a contest every year to come up with an offseason plan to improve the Knicks. None of our plans have ever been anywhere near the level of what Thomas? has done.

Rather than expecting you to make future moves that would be as efficacious as those of Thomas, I?ll propose this contest to you in a different way. Using the benefit of three years worth of hindsight, show us how you would have constructed a better roster in the same time frame.

And what other teams are you using to form your argument? Please don?t come back with the Suns, Spurs, and Pistons. Most of us understand that those teams had virtually nothing in common with the Knicks? situation.

?Phoenix took a good part of this roster and went on to win 60 games.?

Phoenix happened to have Amare Stoudemire, Joe Johnson, and Shawn Marion. Trading Marbury and Hardaway was simply addition by subtraction for them as it gave those guys, particularly Johnson, expanded roles. The Knicks didn?t have one guy like Stoudemire, Johnson, or Marion, let alone three.

?letting Anderson, Eisley, Ward, McDyess, Houston, and others sunset COULD have produced as many wins as we have seen thus far AND brought in a more talented roster to work with.?

Ok, how? The past few drafts certainly haven?t had more talent than what Thomas was able to pick up in trades. Remember, the only reason Balkman, Lee, Robinson, and Collins are here was Thomas? willingness to take on salary.

?Doleac, whom you called useless, I have to say was probably the most effective partner to Marbury the team had at the time. Other than Channing Frye, he was as competent a pick and roll side kick as the team has seen?

Kurt Thomas was by far the most effective Knick at executing the pick and pop. However, like Doleac and Frye, the fact that he only took jumpers made him a pretty inefficient big on the offensive end.

?He just happened not to, and went on to win a championship when he didn?t.?

Doleac actually did clear waivers and he was subsequently signed by the Nuggets. He won the championship because he signed a rather inflated free agent deal after his strong performance with the Knicks. What was that about Thomas? selling high?

I?d say it has to do with the fact that Brown?s a crazy, vindictive, spiteful man. He wanted to hurt the Knicks as much as possible for the perceived slights against him. To do so most effectively he sabotaged the team and then squeezed the franchise for money. Call it adding insult to injury. What a petty, horrible person. Not that I dislike him or anything like that.

?Also, his health being as it was, he certainly didn?t need to create additional stress for himself, which tanking a season on purpose in a power play tends to do.?

I?m not sure how his behavior was stress-inducing. He didn?t have to agonize about how to win games or anything like that. He just had to think up crazy schemes to disrupt the team and make winning games as difficult as possible.

?I have to agree with retropkid when he says ?You give Zeke a pass for 2004/5???? He has to be accountable ? he participated in the decision to bring in Brown.?

You?re right, he does have to be held accountable. But for some reason I blame Brown?s actions primarily on himself. I?m still somewhat married to the concept of personal responsibility, even in today?s society. In my mind, you don?t sue McDonalds for burning yourself with coffee and you don?t blame the boss for being a horrendous employee.

?Grunfeld was accounatable for the slide. He was also a better GM than Isiah.?

I don?t know about a better GM than Isiah Thomas, but he was certainly much better than Layden. Grunfeld?s firing was unfortunate and a very poor decision. He wasn?t fired as a result of being ?held accountable? but moreso because Checketts felt someone had to be fired. It?s that sort of irrational behavior that led to the Knicks becoming a complete mess.

?Finally? all of IT?s problems boil down to one thing: he can?t negotiate. Free agent contracts are bigger than they need to be to land the player. (Not affecting our cap situation, but killing future trade value) In trades, he doesn?t understand his leverage ? he essentially saved Phoenix, Toronto and Orlando in those respective trades ? and gives away more than he has to, almost every time. The Randolph trade is the one exception, so maybe he?s learning ? but I?m skeptical. It?s not a problem with identifying talent; it?s business management. Considering he sank the CBA, the track record isn?t good.?

This is completely untrue and I have no idea how you?ve conjured up this notion. The only non-MLE contracts that Thomas has negotiated are those of Crawford and Curry, both of whom are paid quite reasonably. Thomas has gotten excellent value in all of his deals and he?s used his leverage quite nicely. What?d you expect him to get?

?As far as the roster inherited?the Bobcats inherited nothing but a draft of players other teams didn?t want and a #4 pick, yet still won 33 games last year.?

Clearly something has been lost on you on the relative merits of starting with your pick of players from every NBA team and a commitment of $0 in salaries. It?s a completely different situation that has absolutely nothing in common with what Thomas started with.

?This leads me to the point that he could have cut the underacheivers/untalented player (as he did with Shandon Anderson) or let their contracts expire and still ended up with a better team than last season?s Knicks.?

Ok, what would the roster have been then?

?GMs from Joe Dumars to John Paxson to Rod Thorn have accomplished this in a shorter time frame. Even the great Danny Ainge looks on track to accomplish this in a similar time frame to Isiah?s.?

We?ve been through this, several times. Dumars inherited a highly competitive roster. John Paxson inherited a roster full of young talent and still yielded plenty of lottery picks. Rod Thorn inherited a team with quite a few good players and the #1 pick in the draft. Danny Ainge has been an unmitigated disaster and the only reason he has a chance this year is because of his good friend Kevin McHale.

?just want to note that this is how the Knicks? teams of the 90s were assembled.?

The Knick teams of the 90s were built on the strength of one of the greatest players of all time. The supporting cast is the reason they never won.

?As I said, I?m open to arguments that the man is the root of all evil.?

Why, because he?s a fairly dumb guy who just wants the team to win? He?s hardly Layden, whose craptacular moves virtually crippled the franchise, or Brown, who did his best to attempt to cripple the franchise.

?I mean people were literally calling Jerome James extremely overpaid when he was on his last (much smaller) contract, it didn?t take a genius to realize that giving him the MLE was a terrible idea.?

His last contract was larger than his current contract. And he was the best available player, why not offer him the MLE? The money didn?t matter and still doesn?t. I have no idea why this signing was and continues to be such an issue for some people. It?s completely insignificant. It?s the equivalent of bashing Layden for Slavko Vranes.

?This is only half the story. Trades for Steph, Mo Taylor, and Eddy Curry each cost the Knicks multiple draft picks. Isiah has done wonderful things with the draft, especially compared to Layden, but I think it?s hard to argue that trading away several high draft picks and acquiring late firsts is a net +.?

Marbury was one 1st rounder and one highly conditional first rounder. The ?04 pick turned into Kirk Snyder and the second one still hasn?t been given up. Mo Taylor was a swap of an ?06 second for an ?05 second, hardly giving away multiple picks or even a single pick. Eddy Curry cost the Knicks one first rounder which turned into Tyrus Thomas, thanks to the sabotage of Brown. The other pick was simply a swap, which was hardly an issue. We?ll see what happens to the second rounders. Thomas? basic theory is that the mid-to-late lottery talent available isn?t appreciably better than the later first round talent, particularly when the players he wants are available fairly late. Likewise, the picks he?s giving away are deemed to be of lower value than the players he?s receiving in return.

?As Z points out, no one else was charged with handling Layden?s mess, so we can?t really say someone else would have done a better or worse job in more or less time.?

Sure we can. Try and come up with a better scenario than what Thomas has put together. And you have the benefit of three years worth of hindsight.

?The Mo Taylor trade might not have been a big deal for the Rockets, but I think the Marbury, Jalen Rose, Crawford, and Curry deals all have a lot to do with why the Suns, Raptors, and Bulls have become much better teams in the wake of dealing with Thomas.?

This is completely untrue.

The Suns became a better team after the Marbury trade because they happened to have three amazing players, Johnson, Stoudemire, and Marion, who, as the 02-03 playoffs demonstrated, were held back by Marbury?s dominance of the ball. Addition by subtraction works if you?ve got the talent in place.

The Raptors became a much better team after the Rose trade because they completely revamped the team. The cap room allowed them to add more players, but Fred Jones was the only NBA free agent they brought in.

As far as the Bulls go, they became a better team after the departure of Crawford because they added Gordon, Deng, and Nocioni that offseason. Those additions were completely unrelated to the Crawford trade. After the Curry trade, the team actually got worse.

The bottom line is that Thomas has given these teams the flexibility that they wanted and Thomas has gotten the better players he wanted. The trades were win/win, which is the basic underlying premise of engaging in trade. The expiring deals were useless to Thomas.

This is only half the story. Trades for Steph, Mo Taylor, and Eddy Curry each cost the Knicks multiple draft picks. Isiah has done wonderful things with the draft, especially compared to Layden, but I think it’s hard to argue that trading away several high draft picks and acquiring late firsts is a net +.

I don’t see a fundemental difference in approach in terms of overpaying or digging a deeper and deeper salary cap hole.

“Layden?s mess would take at least 4 full seasons to fix. This is Thomas? 4th full season. This is also the year that Thomas is free of all the financial obligations Layden left behind (Houston?s and Anderson?s contracts).”

I don’t know how I feel about this. As Z points out, no one else was charged with handling Layden’s mess, so we can’t really say someone else would have done a better or worse job in more or less time. I just think that it’s impossible to say it couldn’t have been done better and more quickly, while it also might have been handled worse. Although with a total of 89 wins over the past 3 seasons I think there’s a lot more room up then down.

If the Knicks are a very good team season, I would be willing to say fair enough although I would have done things differently and he certainly could have won more games in his first 3 full seasons Isiah rebuilt in about 3 years, which is about the standard expectation.

As far as how much Layden’s leftovers hurt him… Other teams have had a lot of success “giving away” excessive contracts of underperformers, cutting them, or letting them expire. The Bulls even told Tim Thomas to stay home rather than suit up. Thefatkid might say that they clearly didn’t want to win games. I don’t know if they would have won more or less games with Thomas in uniform, but they not only told him to stay home but also refused to acquire players at a “discount” with his expiring contract and have still won several more games over the past 2 seasons than the Knicks.

Anyway, this is why I think that Layden’s legacy might be the reason Isiah has failed thus far, but it is not a valid excuse: other guys have come into bad situations and produced championship contenders and even champions in a few years. I think that’s the standard against which Isiah should be judged.

-On a slightly related topic, another thing I find difficult to understand is how Isiah has “won” so many trades when most of the team’s he’s traded with have gone on to have so much success. The Mo Taylor trade might not have been a big deal for the Rockets, but I think the Marbury, Jalen Rose, Crawford, and Curry deals all have a lot to do with why the Suns, Raptors, and Bulls have become much better teams in the wake of dealing with Thomas. These teams all lost highly paid (after the sign and trades in Crawford and Curry’s cases) starters and supposed “stars,” cleared cap room they have used to sign some of their better players (especially Nash but also Ben Wallace, Parker or Garbajosa) and/or got some very promising youngsters. There are certainly win-win trades, but until the Knicks start to win I don’t think these can be described that way.

-On another, even less realted topic. I think thefatkid’s proposed team of Igoudala, Ty Thomas, Noah, Daniel Gibson wouldn’t be such a bad starting point for building a decent team. I was too worried about why it didn’t make sense to propose such a scenario to actually think about the players. With those 4 and a few more well placed pieces like, for example, Lee and Balkman (who I know were acquired through Isiah’s trades, but maybe he could have bought a couple picks or acquired one through some other trade and still taken those 2 or 2 comparable players) and you’ve got the makings of a very good young defensive team. Probably wouldn’t be a great offense without some other pieces, but the Knicks were only the 17th best offense last season in terms of offensive efficiency anyway.

You got it right!! Layden is the root of the problem but Thomas gets much of the blame. Layden put together a group of players with awful contracts. It all started with giving Houston (whom I loved) double what he was offered elsewhere. They traded Ewing for Rice when they should have let Ewing retire or let his contract expire as a Knick. Layden dug the hole deeper by trading Rice for two of his old Utah buddies Shandon Anderson and Howard Iseley. Sure they looked ok with Stockton and Malone absorbing all the defensive attention, but without SUPERSTARS to help them, they showed how truly awful they were.

Furthermore, Layden was wasting or trading draft picks. Layden recieved two 2001 first round picks when he traded Ewing. Layden traded these pick to get Othella Harrington and Mark Jackson. Had he just kept the picks he could have drafted Zach Randolph and Tony Parker (hindsight being 20-20).

In 2002, by far his worst move, Layden drafts Nene over both Stoudamire and Butler. Then trades Nene for a player that gave us 18 games in his two year stint!! Plus he traded Camby in that deal. That is just unforgiveable.

In sum, Layden crippled the Knicks with salary. He traded a first team defensive player (Camby). He missed a chance to draft several great players (Stoudamire, Butler, Randolph, and Parker). He drafted several busts (Donnell Harvey, Eric Chenowith, Sweetney). Though, he is not responsible for Fredric Wiess, that was Ed Tapscott’s baby.

Enter Thomas. Thomas takes a diffrent approach. Thomas takes on a few bad contracts but he get a draft pick with each of them. The Malik and Jalen Rose deals brought in David Lee, Mardy Collins, and Renaldo Balkman respectively. Trading Kurt brought in Nate Robinson.

Layden’s mess would take at least 4 full seasons to fix. This is Thomas’ 4th full season. This is also the year that Thomas is free of all the financial obligations Layden left behind (Houston’s and Anderson’s contracts).

We will start to see tangible results this year. I will not bash Isiah for bringing in young talent. I will bash him for the Jerome James signing. What was he thinking? No way James get more than a 3 year deal from anyone else. He gave him 5 with a player option for 6. How do you do that for a guy with his pedigree? This is way worse than the Ike Austin deal (3 years 18 million).

The true judging of Isiah should start this year. I say we need to win at least 43 games and we need to leapfrog the Nets in the division.